CC BY
37PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES
SYNTACTIC MODALITY AND ITS EXAMPLES IN SCIENTIFIC DISCOURSE
Lukianova T.
MA student, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, Moscow
Popova S.
Candidate of Linguistics, Associate Professor, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, Moscow
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6778489
Abstract
The article is devoted to the analysis of the author's assessment realization through the syntax in the framework of the scientific discourse. The author's involvement in oral and written texts belonging to the scientific dimension is implied with the help of diverse linguistic means at different language levels and one of them is expressiveness that can be represented through the category of modality. Modern studies have proved that scientific discourse expresses the author's evaluation of the problem under research by phonetic, lexical, syntactic and other means. The degree of the author's evaluation reveals his pragmatic attitude to what he states and sheds light on the emotional state of the addressee. Using various linguistic means of expressing modality, the scientist is influenced by the postulates for justifying an opinion which strengthens the specific cultural context of scientific presentation. Nevertheless, it is through the syntactic level having close interconnection with the content of the utterance that the implicit assessment can be revealed. An important purpose of the article is to identify syntactic means used in scientific discourse that express the author's modality on the basis of scientific literature of linguistic dimension. The research approach of the mixed-method research approach with general theoretical and linguistic analysis of scientific literature, semantic, deductive and quantitative analysis of the data collected illustrates the classification of syntactic means possessing the author's assessment. As a result, it is possible to single out six syntactic means of modality. The results obtained in the course of our research are of practical value for further research of scientific discourse, the accurate communicative behavior for representatives of the scientific community. Moreover, they contribute to the hypothesis about the evaluative constituent of scientific discourse, stating that the language of scientific specificity cannot be considered purely devoid of any kind of objective narration.
Keywords: Scientific discourse, modality, evaluation, syntactic means, implicitness, author's involvement
Introduction
It is impossible not to note that one of the modern world's key characteristics is the omnipresent and daily process of global informatization. It implies that more people from different walks social stratums dealing with various fields of professional activity start having access to more scientific resources to expand their own knowledge, as well as to continue establishing scientific hypotheses in order to advance science.
Informatization affects both specialists of a particular area as well as semi-professionals or even lay public with nothing but background knowledge. It may hamper them to understand what is being implied in the scientific context due to the use of special narrowly specialized terms or intricate syntactic constructions. Thus, the latest scientific discoveries and inventions are described not only in scientific publications and monographs, but also in newspaper articles, the style of which is characterized as both scientific and publicist. It is also important to mention popular scientific discourse which attracts semi-professionals and the lay public who are interested in the obtaining of knowledge. Nevertheless, it is through scientific language that researchers are able to present their studies of a particular phenomenon and develop scientific ideas. All of the above accentuates the need to have a thorough study of scientific discourse that encompasses professional scientific communication and allows to perform scientific activities with the further verbal descriptions of the results obtained.
To the present, a great number of researches is devoted to scientific discourse and its specifics at different levels of the language system. Generalization, abstraction, logical presentation and objectivity, which leads to minimal manifestation of emotions (if there is any at all) are considered basic features that characterize scientific discourse. The influence of these characteristics on the functioning of subjective modality in the texts of scientific discourse is expressed in a low frequency of expression of subjective modality in comparison with other institutional discursive types. However, it is hardly possible to exclude completely the author's involvement. It can be stated that the expression of the author's attitude to what is being reported in scientific community is carried out in a text of scientific dimension in a special form distinctive to this type of discourse. It cannot also be denied that science in its broad meaning is aimed at developing new knowledge, verifying the old one or elaboration on new features which also posses the author's nature and it is the author of the research who chooses the language means for the presentation of the scientific hypothesis [4].
The most highly proven feature of this discursive type is scientific objectivity that implies the decrease of subjective influence on scientific methods, investigations and results. Aiming at objectivity is believed to decrease any use of subjective modality. Scientific activity is considered as a collective work to expand ideas about the world phenomena. That is why the author's interference is intentionally minimized.
More attention is nowadays focused on the means of subjective modality manifestation in scientific discourse. This may be conditioned by the dual origin of scientific discourse. On the one hand, texts of scientific orientation are characterized by accuracy, unambiguity and objectivity. On the other hand, most authors convey evaluation of results, methods and means of scientific research. That is why it becomes impossible to say that scientific discourse can be considered purely objective. Considering the reevaluation of structuralist views on the isolation of the language system, its autonomy and independence from extralinguistic factors, language of scientific communication cannot be longer considered as an impartial and impersonal form of discursive activity. The linguistic facts of subjective modality actualization have already received verbal confirmation.
Theoretical background
Scientific discourse is a field of linguistic studies that is nowadays drawing more professional attention. It is a polysemantic term that has been broadly used since the 1970s, along with the development and the spread of the concept of discourse in West European and American science. It is a specific way of organizing speech activity in the scientific environment which includes linguistic, cognitive, political features and is aimed for any representatives of the scientific community [12].
O. V. Kotik and L. V. Tolstikova interpret scientific discourse as an expression and reflection of scientific style being a unique way of cognitive and communicative speech actions of an interlocutor who is to be informed of new knowledge about reality and provide rationale of its credibility in the communication process [6, p. 59-65].
Increasingly, scientific discourse may be referred to as an institutional type, which, according to V. I. Karasik, is conditioned by status-role participants in relations and social institutions within which this communication takes place [5]. Thus, T. R. Vanko is inclined to give scientific discourse the status of an institutional type. She believes that scientific discourse is a generally accepted type of speech behavior of a speaker in the area of scientific performance, determined by so-cio-historical conditions and established stereotypes of the organization and interpretation of scientific texts [2, p. 144-153].
N. L. Nikulshina also adheres to the opinion that scientific discourse is of an institutional type and that it is aimed at verbal production of new knowledge about the surrounding world, conditioned by the communicative canons of scientific communication, the participants of which are scientists-researchers, the method of implementation is scientific dialogue, and its values are contained in key concepts: truth, knowledge, research [10, p. 245-250].
The ubiquity of scientific and technological progress and informatization advances interest in the study of the language of scientific literature. Obviously, scientific discourse varies greatly from other types, as scientific communication is stipulated by its communicative aims, participants and objectives. It is strictly separated from daily communicative situations and cannot be identified to other discursive types, like political or
economic, although they share the same strive for implicit manifestation of the authors assessment [1, p. 335]. Due to the fact that nowadays a great number of linguists agree that all institutional discursive types are in synthesis, it is still necessary to understand what distinguishes scientific discourse from its counterparts. That is why we resort to a coherent enumeration of the distinctive scientific peculiarities of scientific discourse:
1) The division of scientific knowledge, i.e. fundamental differentiation of knowledge types according to its novelty. The old knowledge was obtained earlier and verbalized in the previously presented textual sources of other authors, while the new knowledge that was obtained directly by the author of a particular study.
2) The participants of scientific discourse
As it has already been noted earlier, the participants of scientific discourse are representatives of the scientific community that includes both qualified competent participants and semiprofessionals as well as the lay public aimed at obtaining new knowledge. All of the may be considered equal in the process of scientific communication since they equally have the right to enter scientific community to a certain extent.
3) The use of terminology
It is a common requirement for scientists in any area of research to use a set of terms as they help to disclose the notion of the subject of the study so that it can reach precision and further development. It is necessary that every term is complied with the demands of accuracy and logic. Both general and specialized terminological units can be employed depending on the area of science.
4) The use of functional resources, i.e. diagrams, tables, symbols, signs and plans that illustrate the subject of the study, add information to the research and serve as explanatory means.
5) Accuracy, i.e. a strict focus on a particular field of scientific research. It may be ensured by the use of references, special lexis of limited application and exact data (for instance, statistics).
6) Criticism
Scientific statements are always subject to critical consideration due to possible presence of errors or discrepancy between scientific realities inherent in the way of thinking, therefore any researcher is obliged to self-criticize his inquiry in order to eliminate possible errors [8, p. 138 - 139]. Eventually, it is the criticism of any scientific research that allows us to speak about the subjective nature of scientific communication.
7) Methodological attitude
Scientific research involves the use of a well-tested set of methods. Nevertheless, the implementation of one method is hardly possible because a scientist, in an attempt to develop his own concept or hypothesis, to develop his own conclusions, often tends to go beyond the generally accepted methods. This encourages the researcher to invent modern experimental methods and means of observation.
8) Objectivity of scientific knowledge, i.e. deprivation of methods and results dictated by personal ex-
perience with no or lack of scientific outcome, preferences, opinions or other subjective reasoning. Objectivity is often seen as an ideal for scientific research, as well as the basis for giving special importance to scientific knowledge in modern society. A scientist should be objective and rational during the process of investigation. The manner of the presentation of the material should remain impersonal so that the attention to the scientific work is drawn to the contents, the information and not to the author's judgments or points of view. However, we can sometimes observe evaluative constructions for expressing a purely personal point of view like "to my point of view", "in my opinion" that helps to develop the scientific inquiry and to show its ambiguity.
9) Integrity and indivisibility of scientific presentation, i.e. the contents are always presented in a holistic and indivisible way [1, p. 335 - 341].
10) Informativity, that is, the ability to display various information in its full degree.
11) Intertextuality
This feature implies that each scientific text is based on previously established works, so it becomes a part of a universal scientific system of knowledge. In-tertextuality may be realized through the use of quotations, references to other previous sources, links and comments that express the author's view on the particular scientific problem [8, p. 138 - 139].
12) Credibility of scientific knowledge.
13) Cohesion and coherence, i.e. lexical and grammatical relations and a logically organized textual structure with consistent connection between paragraphs and sentences.
It is truly recognized that objectivity can be considered the crucial characteristics of scientific discourse, and the status of means of conveying verbal evaluation is either not reasoned, or they are considered as belonging to other discursive styles. Nevertheless, modern interest in the study of the author's involvement generated the need to study expressive evaluative nature of scientific discourse.
The informative making of new knowledge also produces the incentive effect on the readership. This incentive can be understood as the process of transferring new knowledge in order to convince the target audience of its credibility and the ability to critically evaluate it within the framework of scientific activity [14]. We may trace its manifestation at different levels of the language system with the help of various linguistic means and the establishment of a necessary subjective assessment in the mind of scientific knowledge recipients. The emotional evaluation ensures the author's cognitive performance and receives psychological adjustment. Prior to that, the implicit expression of evaluation retained more focus due to its evidence dismissal of the evident emotional nature that may characterize scientific communication. The emotive evaluation plan acts in relation to the author's cognitive activity as an additional one, though of significant importance [3, p. 18 -22].
The verbal expression of the author's assessment can be expressed at different levels of the language sys-
tem: lexically, phonetically, syntactically, morphologically, intonationally and so on. Due to its explicit nature, lexical and phonetic methods alongside with various communicative techniques show its most obvious manifestation. According to, L. Babenko emotive lexis and phraseological constructions comprise the set of primary means that express the author's evaluation and establish the linguistic image of feelings. Supporting the above-given statement, N. Krasavsky believes that the linguistic representation of emotions is carried out mainly by lexical and phraseological turns [7, p. 134].
Our previous research on the manifestation of the author's subjective evaluation in economic discourse proved that it is important to study syntactic constructions of economic discourse, since syntax of economic discourse cannot still be considered the principal linguistic level of studies. The reason for this is the vast popularity of the lexical level studies because of its relatively high degree of expressing the author's interference. However, it is precisely syntactic constructions that may be employed to express the appropriate content, as well as to present information and ensure the realization of communication in a most adequate way [10].
As a diverse notion that can be studied at every level of the language system modality finds its way of being manifested through various means: morphologically, lexically, syntactically, intonationally. This article is intended to focus on mainly syntactic means to study its implicit character and the lack of the research base. Syntactic modality is the way of expressing emotionally evaluative, figurative and modal meanings through specialized syntactic means. It is used not only to perform an expressive function, but also to take part in the organization of oral and written speech with the stress on the addressees' attention [11, p. 230 - 280].
Studying modern scientific discourse, a lot of linguists notice a tendency to use various syntactic means. However, not all of them adhere to the opinion about the priority of syntactic means. Thus, while investigating expressiveness V. V. Sharova states that lexical means comprise the nucleus of this category and syntactic means are considered to be its peripheral units [15, p. 225]. However, I. A. Skripak is of the view that affirms the primary character of syntactic means of scientific communication as the use of lexical means is restricted by rules of scientific discourse [12, p. 68]. Despite of the existing controversy between the syntactic and lexical means, both of them help to reveal modality that is an inseparable part of scientific discourse.
According to S. L. Nistratova syntactic means of expressing modality in the scientific complex represent a precisely organized system with the nucleus (the centre) and the periphery. Each of these two parts is represented by different language means [9, p. 78 - 94].
Material and Methods
Material of the research is represented by the examples of syntactic means derived from the English-language literature of scientific and popular scientific orientation, namely:
1) J. Bybee, S. Fleischman "Modality in grammar and discourse";
2) V. Evans, M. Green "Cognitive linguistics: An Introduction";
3) Jurafsky D., J. H. Martin "Speech and Language Processing: An introduction to Natural Language processing, Coputional Linguistics";
4) R. Wardhaugh "An Introduction to Sociolin-guistics".
The study was conducted with the help of the mixed-method research approach with general theoretical and linguistic analysis of scientific literature, semantic, deductive and quantitative analysis of the data collected.
Study and results
Having examined various sources of the cross-cutting subject, we found that nowadays the problem of studying the expression of author's verbal presence in the scientific discourse is becoming more relevant. It is specifically important to trace the presence of the author's assessment in the literature on linguistics, since these are linguists who, by the nature of their occupation, understand the concept of linguistic text analysis and realize the need to correctly and appropriately express their attitude to the issue under study. After analyzing the sources that form the basis of our work, we have identified the following most frequent syntactic means of expressing the author's assessment at the syntactic level:
1) Exclamatory sentences
Exclamation is considered to be the most explicit way of transmitting evaluation. Nevertheless, traditionally exclamatory sentences are considered to be eliminated in scientific discourse as they can be too emotional and break the scientific objectivity of presenting the facts. However, our further research has proven that this type of sentences still occurs, and it is one of the means of expressing subjective evaluation in scientific communication [2, p. 144-153].
2) Interrogative structures
According to S. L. Nistratova syntactic means of expressing modality in scientific complex represent a precisely organized system with the nucleus and the periphery. They represent the periphery in accordance with the relatively low degree of their expressive ability. These structures differ in the extent of their nominative and modal characteristics. All of these units are not identical in their structure, functions and the degree of their modal expression [11, p. 78 - 94].
These are the following interrogative units:
2.1.) Rhetorical questions
A rhetorical question is considered a question-statement, the answer to which is not required or expected due to its extreme obviousness for the speaker. However, science precisely provides ignorance of the speaker about this or that phenomenon, and therefore seeks to give possible answers. This type of interrogative sentences is quite widespread in scientific texts and it performs two major functions: intensification of the reader's attention to a certain scientific problem and the formulation of the author's personal attitude to the subject of the research. What is peculiar about rhetorical questions is that they implement both the meaning of a question and of a statement and thus can be regarded as an indirect form of a dialogue [11, p. 78 - 94].
2.2.) Question - in - the - narrative
The question - in - the - narrative is a result of a so - called mute dialogue with a monological question which sets the reader's attention to the scientific problem under research. The specific feature of this complex is that this is the author who answers the questions, although it is expected from a reader. In this case evaluation can be reached by adding parenthesis, colloquial units, inversion and repetition to the answer. Modern scientific texts tend not to separate the question and the answer. Both a question and an answer are lexically and syntactically connected with each other, so they become dependent on syntactic and semantic sides. They help the author to present his thoughts and to involve readers by intensifying their attention in the course of a dialogue [2, p. 144 - 153].
1.1)
3) Syntactic parallelism (which can also be considered a way of syntactic repetition)
I. A. Skripak states that lexical, syntactic and purely syntactic types of repetition can coexist in scientific discourse. These means may be used to draw the attention of an addressee, add more expressiveness to its organization and achieve clarity of scientific speech, being the key characteristic inherent in scientific discourse. This linguistic means of conveying subjective modality in scientific discourse serves as a basis of another syntactic means of expressiveness - syntactic parallelism. It is considered to be one of the crucial means in the scientific communication as it organizes judgments in a parallel way based on the principles of the organization of scientific discourse - logic and rationality of narration. Parallelism also serves to express clarification depending on what the author finds significant to explain [12, p, 156].
4) Inversion with a part of the predicate
As far as syntactic inversion goes, it is also present in the scientific discourse in spite of the fact that this type of discourse is organized with the help of direct word order that helps to eliminate vagueness being a general conventional characteristic of the English language. In this case, the author uses this syntactic method in order to pay special attention to the inverted centre of the statement. The meaning does not change but it gains more coloring and intellectual assessment.
5) Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with various modal meanings. Studying the above-mentioned constructions T. R. Vanko showed that the degree of evaluation that they express in scientific discourse is very high [2, p. 144 - 153]. The following types of the above-mentioned structures can be distinguished:
a) Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of credibility. They employed to help to persuade the addressee of the certain point of view accuracy by stressing its credibility and evidence.
The meaning of credibility is conveyed with the help of the following predicates: it is cer-tain/clear/common/evident/natural/obvious/plain/true (But it is clear enough that this readiness to forget the etymological meaning of a word in favor of its deriva-
still observe the use of the following predicates: it is striking, it is regrettable, it is surprising.
e) Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of necessity
In this type of grammatical structures, we observed the use of the predicate it is necessary or it is essential.
f) Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of general evaluation
They are considered to be encountered on a lower basis perhaps of its excessive general character, whereas science strives for the accuracy of knowledge. Nevertheless, such predicates as it is good, it is bad, it is natural can still be referred to this type [2, p. 144 -153].
We find it significant to highlight that not all of the sentences with the formal introductory "it" possess expressive features. This is why we also single out another type of sentences with the formal introductory "it" without any manifestation of subjective expressiveness.
In order to justify the results of our research, to establish the solid base for their usage and make it possible to expand our research to further studies of the modality manifestation in the language of economics, we provide various examples of the usage of stated syntactic methods in the Economist articles in the table below:
Table 1.
Syntactic means of expressing modality in the economic discourse
Exclamatory sentences Malay continues to have a place in everyday life in Singapore but knowledge of Tamil has declined. Consequently, a native of Singapore is likely to understand, and use, with different levels of success, Mandarin, Hokkien, English, Malay, and local varieties of each of these. Truly a multilingual situation! [22, p. 372] The author gives an example of the language situation amid Singaporean residents, who can understand and are likely to use not only the Malay language daily speech, but also Mandarin, Tamil, Hokkien, English and their varieties. He gives his opinion on the multilingual situation in Singapore in the second sentence with the help of an exclamation mark that expresses a rather high degree of the author's assessment.
Rhetorical questions One way to code this message is just to use the binary representation of the horse's number as a code; thus, horse 1 would be 001, horse 2 010, horse 3 011 and so on, with horse 8 coded as 000. If we spend the whole day betting and each horse is coded with 3 bits, on average we would be sending 3 bits per race. Can we do better? [21, p. 57] This example does not purely concern the linguistic notions as it is present in the discussion of the example that concerned coding of the message. Thus, the author does not provide the reader with the direct answer as he wants himself to evaluate the situation and let him think of his own point of view.
Question-in-the-narrative Does the semantic structure found in language reflect a systematic structure within our conceptual system? Cognitive linguists certainly think so. Cognitive linguists explore the hypothesis that certain kinds of linguistic expressions provide evidence that the structure of our conceptual systems is reflected in the patterns of language [20, p.68]. The author states difficulties in understanding the role of the linguistic semantic structure and these of the human conceptual system so he evaluates their relationship as difficult. It is precisely the question-in-the-narrative that explains concepts which are difficult for comprehension in an easy and understandable manner by establishing an indirect contact with the reader, though not expecting his answers and explanations (answering provides this explanation). It draws the reader's attention and maintains it throughout the whole explanatory part that establishes the impression of a directive similar to the one in a manual book.
tive application, to sink its native condition in its official character, prepares the way for mutilation and mutation.) [2, p. 144 - 153].
b) Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of speech and mental activity. They provide the functioning of the principal feature of scientific discourse - objectivity.
The following verbal predicates in the passive voice can be traced: it is asserted, it is assumed, it is believed, it is desired, it is expected, it is known, it is hoped, it is noted, it is proposed, it is realized, it is suggested [2, p. 144 - 153]. It is also the use of the Passive Voice that helps to reach objectivity.
c) Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of intellectual assessment which are aimed at evaluation of the scientific information in terms of its significance and therefore at impact on the addressee.
There can be found the following predicates: it is allowable, it is appropriate, it is competent, it is difficult, it is easy, it is fair, it is hard, it is interesting, it is legitimate, it is peculiar, it is plausible, it is reasonable, it is relevant, it is wise [2, p. 144 - 153].
d) Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of literal emotional evaluation.
Although they are not so common due to the general objective character of scientific narration, we may
Syntactic parallelism Since probabilities are (by definition) less than or equal to 1, the more probabilities we multiply together, the smaller the product becomes [21, p.43]. Since the scientific work where this example is taken from refers the basics of cognitive linguistics, the author studies different formulae concerning its subject of discussion. In this case he finds it significant to stress that the number of probabilities does matter in terms of describing a product and when it is somewhat connected with number 1, it changes the state of a product. Here modality is reached through the comparative construction "the more... the less... ".
Inversion with a part of the predicate Not only is word meaning composed from semantic primitives, but sentence meaning is composed from the word meaning, together with the structure imposed on those words by the grammar [20, p.171]. In this example the author studies the linguistic composition of two formal language models and their meanings and finds it significant to persuade the reader that they are seman-tically and grammatically coherent. It is inversion of the subject and the predicate that helps to influence the reader, to convince him of the author's rightness and to make it more expressive.
Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of credibility It is true that the development of apprehensional epistemics involves pragmatic strengthening and this is not necessarily the end of the process of semantic/pragmatic change [19, p. 247]. In this sentence the author tries to persuade the reader that in order to make the epistemics change one should come across a certain way that includes pragmatic strengthening, but this method, to the author's point of view, does not mean that either pragmatic or semantic changes of the epistemics should be discarded. The modal meaning is verbalized through the use of the predicate it is true.
Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of speech and mental activity In English, it is to be assumed that negative is formally associated with the modal, since it is generally criticized [20, p. 102]. In this example the author argues about the meaning of a negative constructions and he is inclined to think that negative meaning can be equal to modal verbs. Evaluation here concerns both negative and modal constructions and their formal expression in language. The predicate it is to be assumed is employed in order to clarify this linguistic idea so that the reader easily gets it.
Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of intellectual assessment Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of literal emotional evaluation It is interesting to suppose that these linguistic categories and structures are more or less straightforward mappings from a preexisting conceptual space, programmed into our biological nature [20, p. 62]. In this example the author finds it significant to say that certain linguistic categories are a part of a conceptual space and they somehow reflect it and thus are considered to be an important part of it. He wants to attract the reader's attention to this particular linguistic feature, to accentuate it. The meaning of subjective modality is reached here through the use of the predicate it is possible that is verbalized by an adjective possible.
Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of necessity Once a conversation has been initiated and the opening forms have been exchanged, it will be necessary to establish a topic or topics on which to talk [22, p. 300]. In this sentence the author evaluates the importance of introducing a topic of conversation right after formally performed verbal forms of politeness. The modal meaning of necessity is verbalized through the use of the predicate it is necessary that characterizes the necessity to behave appropriately in the current situation.
Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of general evaluation It is good that linguistic inputs contain many instances of all kinds of indefinite references, and it is, therefore, critical for any meaning representation language to be able to handle this kind of expression [21, p. 300]. In this example the author evaluates the contents of certain linguistic inputs. Moreover, he assesses the degree of importance to use indefinite references that make up the data contents in order to handle a particular expression. The modal meaning of general evaluation is verbalized through the use of the predicate it is good.
Sentences with the formal introductory "it" without subjective modal meaning
It is known as vector semantics, which instantiates this linguistic hypothesis by learning representations of the meaning of words directly from their distributions in the text [21, p. 101].
In this example we observe the use of the predicate "it is known " which refers to the structures with the modal meaning of speech and mental activity. However, here the author is not aimed at expressing any degree of subjective evaluation; he simply provides explicit information about the notion of a particular linguistic model. "It" in this case substitutes a noun "model" and acts as a subject of the sentence._
Conclusion
In this paper we have studied the realization of the expressive constituent of scientific discourse that is represented through the category of modality at its syntactic level. We have also identified and examined syntactic means used in scientific discourse to express the author's subjective evaluation in the framework of scientific literature on linguistics. The main results are formulated in the theses below:
1) It goes without saying that scientific discourse is considered to be very objective in terms of factual information presentation, as one of the main criteria for scientific discourse functioning is accuracy and integrity of scientific knowledge on the object of research, which is achieved precisely with the help of objectivity. Accuracy of knowledge also requires professionalism and competence of the addressee, therefore, the process of text generation in scientific speech reflects rules of the cognitive process. In this regard, one of the stereotypes about scientific discourse is a cliched and restrained presentation which is realized with the help of objectivity.
2) Our analysis of the selected scientific literature confirms the hypothesis that authors not only strive for conveying scientific knowledge to the target audience. After having conducted the consistent and holistic research the data we have obtained illustrates that the implementation of these objectives is impossible without the usage of linguistic means that attract the target audience, convinces it of the validity of the material presented, encourages it for further actions, as well as evaluates the results obtained in comparison with the existing ones with the identification of new significant differences, disadvantages or advantages of the new knowledge. This is exactly what contributes to the emergence of the "emotional" reaction.
3) As we can see from the listed examples obtained in the course of our research "emotional" reaction in this case is not necessarily realized in its literal form of an experienced feeling, biologically embedded in a person in response to what is being experienced, but also in subsequent actions and deeds. For example, in terms of sentences with the formal introductory "it" that have been studied in this article, evaluation in such constructions is presented objectively since the subject of these structures is always expressed by the impersonal pronoun "it" so that the doer of the action is omitted and it is unclear who expresses the evaluation to the issue if it is expressed at all. However, this is a way for the author to influence the reader, to present the information in the form of objective knowledge, so that the reader perceives it as one hundred percent correct and credible.
4) As stated before, the author's involvement in scientific discourse can be manifested at different levels of the language system. Despite of the most generally accepted theory implying that the presence of the author's assessment is the most verbally vivid at the lexical level, it is precisely the syntactic level that allows the author to express a more vivid manifestation of an implicit author's assessment, though not so evident, but, nevertheless, being a more devious and skillful way to show his or her attitude to the statement.
5) Our research conducted with the help of the mixed-method research approach with general theoretical and linguistic analysis of scientific literature, semantic, deductive and quantitative analysis of the data collected allowed us to provide the following classification of syntactic means which represent the author's assessment in the scientific discourse:
a) Exclamatory sentences;
b) Interrogative structures (subdivided into rhetorical questions and question-in-the-narrative);
c) Syntactic parallelism;
d) Inversion with the part of a predicate;
e) Sentences with the formal introductory "it" with the modal meaning of:
• credibility
• speech and mental activity
• intellectual assessment
• literal emotional evaluation
• necessity
• general evaluation
• no subjective modal meaning
All the above-mentioned syntactic means of expressing subjective modality serve to implement communicative aims of scientific discourse - that is to convey the scientific information of the research to the readership and to persuade the recipient of its trustworthiness. They help the scientist to express his personal stance on the problem under research, to stress the most significant information, to attract the reader's attention and to persuade him of the scientific validity. The author's subjective modality is a feature of scientific discourse that ensures the effectiveness of the argumentation. It may be expressed through a wide range of language means, not only through explicit lexical means, but also through implicit ones, through syntactic means, which was of a principal interest of this article.
The prospect of our research development includes the possibility of analyzing more explicit syntactic ways that express the author's evaluation, such as modal verbs, parenthetical structures, parcellation and inserted constructions.
References:
1. Aksenova T. V. Subjective modality in scientific and scientific publicistic discourse// Vestnik of the Mari State University. - 2021. - T. 15. - № 3(43). - p. 335-341.
2. Vanko T. R. On the issue of emotional impact of scientific discourse// Vestnik of Moscow State Linguistic University. Humanities. 2014. №25 (711). - p. 144 - 153
3. Danilevskaya N. V. Scientific text in the aspect of the interdiscursive approach // Perm University Herald. Russian and Foreign Philology. 2009. №3. - p. 18 - 22
4. Zinevich N. V. Scientific discourse from the aspect of interaction between the categories of modus and modality// Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, Humanitarian Series - 2020. - T. 65. - № 4. - p. 451-460.
5. Karasik V. I. Language Circle: personality, concepts, discourse // [Language Circle: personality, concepts, discourse]. Moscow: Gnozis. - 2004
6. Kotik O. V., Tolstikova L. V. The concept of expressiveness in scientific discourse (based on English-language scientific articles)// The Bulletin of the Adyghe State University. Series "Philology and Art". 2021. №1 (272). - p. 59-65
7. Krasavsky N. A. Emotional concepts in German and Russian linguocultures. M.: Gnozic, 2008. -374 p.
8. Krotkov E. A., Kozhemyakin E. A. Scientific discourse // Discourse-P. 2013. №3. - p. 138 - 139
9. Nistratova S. L. Language, conscience, communication// MAKS Press. - 2004. - №28 - p.78 - 94
10. Nikulshina N. L. Written scientific discourse as an object of modeling for educational purposes // Tomsk State University Journal 2008. №3. - p. 245 -250
11. Paducheva E. V. Semantic research: Semantics of time and type in the Russian language; Semantics of narrative. 2nd edition/ — M.: Languages of Slavic culture, 2010. — p. 230 - 280
12. Skripak I. Y. Linguistic manifestation of expressiveness as a way of speech influence in modern scientific discourse (based on the material of articles on linguistics in Russian and English) - Stavropol, 2008.
- p.199
13. Tazetdinova R. R. Grammatical peculiarities of English scientific discourse// Vestnik of Naberezhnye Chelny Pedagogical University - 2021. - № S2-2(31). - p. 22-24.
14. Famina, N. V. The use of may, can, shall and will verbs to convey the pecularities of textual modality in scientific discourse// Actual problems of humanities and natural sciences. - 2018. - No. 6. - pp. 43-57. -EDN XPTRVR.
15. Sharova V. V. Category of expressiveness in the Russian language (compared to the English language). - SPB, 2002, p.225
16. Bybee J., Fleischman S. Modality in grammar and discourse / edited by Joan Bybee, Suzanne Fleisch-man. p. cm. — (Typological studies in language), 1992
- p. 585
17. Evans V., Green M. "Cognitive linguistics: An Introduction" [electronic resource] https://edisci-plinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/398854/mod_folder/con-tent/0/Evans%20%20Green%20-%20CognitiveLin-guistics-AnIntroduction.pdf?forcedownload=1
18. Jurafsky D., J. H. Martin "Speech and Language Processing: An introduction to Natural Language processing, Coputional Linguistics" [electronic resource] https://www. cs.colorado.edu/~mar-tin/SLP/Updates/1.pdf
19. Wardhaugh R. "An Introduction to Sociolin-guistics" [electronic resource] http://staffnew.uny.ac.id/upload/132107096/pendidi-kan/Book+for+Sociolinguistics.pdf
